Dano Ltd. v Earl Cadogan [2003] EWCA Civ 782 (19 May 2003)

Dano Ltd. v Earl Cadogan [2003] EWCA Civ 782 (19 May 2003)

The restrictive covenant was only enforceable so long as the benefited land formed part of the Cadogan Settled Estate in Chelsea as defined in the 1929 settlement. When the settlement was brought to an end in 1961, the land ceased to be settled land, and the covenant became unenforceable. The clear wording of the covenant cannot be overridden by a purposive interpretation.

Citation
[2003] EWCA Civ 782
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Dano Limited; Defendant/appellant: Charles Gerald John 8th Earl Cadogan; Defendant/appellant: Cadogan Holdings Limited; Defendant/appellant: Cadogan Estates Limited; Defendant/appellant: Oakley Investments Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 May 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Interpretation of Covenants, Settled Land, Benefit and Burden of Covenants
Property Law Equity Restrictive Covenants Interpretation of Covenants Settled Land Benefit and Burden of Covenants

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dano Limited

Claimant/respondent

Charles Gerald John 8th Earl Cadogan

Defendant/appellant

Cadogan Holdings Limited

Defendant/appellant

Cadogan Estates Limited

Defendant/appellant

Oakley Investments Limited

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the restrictive covenant remains enforceable after the Cadogan Settled Estate in Chelsea ceased to exist
  2. 2 Proper interpretation of the phrase 'Cadogan Settled Estate in Chelsea' in the 1929 covenant

Ratio Decidendi

The restrictive covenant was only enforceable so long as the benefited land formed part of the Cadogan Settled Estate in Chelsea as defined in the 1929 settlement. When the settlement was brought to an end in 1961, the land ceased to be settled land, and the covenant became unenforceable. The clear wording of the covenant cannot be overridden by a purposive interpretation.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs order to be agreed and drafted between the parties